I was just wandering around World Freeman Society checking up some old topics to see if there have been any recent developments to report and I ran across these older postings from Xabre that might give us some background into his current problems. It came from this WFS discussion;
http://worldfreemansociety.ca/forum/49- ... mitstart=0
Which we discussed here;
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10309
The last post in our discussion was over seven months ago so I thought I'd check and see if MotorHead had found some way to beat the evil bank in the interim. Nope. But I did find this discussion;
I paid my mortgage with a promissory note - 5 months 2 week ago
Xabre
I am in somewhat of a battle myself,and going to court on the 15th of april 2015 for a much smaller amount but a debt I have also paid by a Promissory Note notarized by a Notary Public, which makes it a legal document.
I sent it to the Financial institution in question on the 20th of Jan 2015, it is now Feb 5th and have not heard so much as a squeak, so i will wait until 30 days has passed and ask what they are doing with the promissory note as I sent the letter to go with Stating that if they did not except my legal offer ,that they were to explain why they were exempt form the legislation. I have NOT heard nary a word.
I paid my mortgage with a promissory note - 5 months 2 week ago
Xabre
I have sent along with the Promissory the letter explaining to them the parts of the Bill of Exchange Act, The Banking Act that applies to my P.N. and why it is an "Exceptable method of payment" and IS a "Negotiable Instrument"under that act, as well as reminding them that should they choose to except my P.N. that through the Membership to the "Payment Association" of Canada which they would be a member, may in fact collect those funds, from either the B.O.C or the Canadian Consolidation Fund
Also if they choose NOT to except my LEGAL payment they MUST send me an explanation as to why they are exempt from that legislation. If they choose to send the P.N. back to me then it is agreed that my balance is "0"
I, however believe they are ignoring me for the following , 1.to get me into court and try to have the Judge rule in their favor, or have me,2. after 30 days consider the case closed ,and NOT show up at the appointed date, time, and court room and again have the Judge rule in their favor by my not showing up.
You would think by now I would have had a least a phone call by either the Banks Rep. or their Attorney, but as of yet nothing.
Oh.. and yes i used "Accept" instead of Except, as I am well aware of the Verbal Trickery they use.
I will not wait the full thirty days as it has now been well over ten and their head office is here in Calgary, so I will press the Bank Rep for some answers, and if she, yields to her council then I will call to find their intention and go from there, because they MUST present full disclosure. but my spider sense tells me they have not run into this before and are doing their Due Diligence in this matter....But then so am I.
But then K1W1 tried to pop Xabre's bubble;
I paid my mortgage with a promissory note - 5 months 2 week ago
kIwI
Xabre wrote:
I am well aware of the Verbal Trickery they use.
Ha! Verbal trickery indeed! I think you really mean except; as in, I reckon everyone except me has to pay for stuff…
Are any of you people (i.e. Xabre, motorheadv10, VNTT) old enough to remember when we used cheques to do business? Do you remember what happened if a cheque wasn’t honoured, or it “bounced”? Yeah, well I can tell you, there was nothing more galling than to accept one of those promissory notes only to find the fuckin’ thing bounced and then having to chase up the shit-head who issued it to get the payment they'd promised. People who make a promise to pay and whose promise then bounces are shit-heads without honour or valid excuse.
So, Xabre and motoerheadv10, why do I get the distinct impression that you two have no intention of actually honouring these “promissory notes” you’re trying to issue, that you‘ll be no better than those dishonourable shit-heads who write out bad cheques?
By the way, a trader is under no obligation to accept a particular form of payment even if it is considered legal tender in the BOE Act; traders don’t have to accept a cheque as payment for goods or services, they don’t even have to accept cash payment -- they can, for instance, insist on payments by credit card only -- and they don’t have to give you the reason why they made that decision. If you don’t like it, you’re always free to go somewhere else to get your stuff. But stamping your feet and insisting they accept a particular form of payment, and then demanding to know why they won’t accept it, is childish.
Xabre, is there any reason why the bank shouldn’t have assumed you knew how credit is created when you went to them and asked for some? Or did you have the words “financially ignorant” tattooed on your forehead and therefore they should have known you were?
And let me get this straight: You made payments from your bank account to another party or parties even though, dishonourably, you knowingly didn’t have the funds in your account to cover them, but in order to keep you in honour, rather than let your payments bounce, the bank extended your overdraft beyond the limit you'd previously agreed to. Ah, but wait: You say you didn’t know how much was in your account and that the bank was irresponsible for not being there to make you aware there were insufficient funds when you made those payments. And presumable the bank should have known that you’re financially irresponsible because you’ve obviously got that tattooed across your forehead, too. Is that right?
So, you claim the bank is dishonourable for extending your overdraft limit to keep you in honour, and also for not knowing that you’re financially ignorant and irresponsible (even if they know it now). And you’re going to argue this in court? Wow, how Freeman of you. I think it’s great that you can, if not so much that you will.
And motorheadv10, in your case I doubt that anyone who matters cares about the merits of your particular argument provided you continue making payments, eh.
Own nothing, owe nothing…
Which triggered this from Xabre;
I paid my mortgage with a promissory note - 5 months 1 week ago
Xabre
I Was waiting for you to put your 2 cents worth in...and also knew that you would play the part of the opposition as it were.. as is always your route in these little issues.
I have in fact gone over the Bills of Exchange Act of Canada. and the Criminal Code of Canada, and the Banking Act of Canada, and the Canada Payment Association Procedure, and the fact is they DO NOT have to except my 100% legal Negotiable Instrument. but in sending my P.N. I sent a letter explaining that if they did not except it (which I fully expect they wont)then to explain in writing why they are exempt from the legislation, and if they did not then my balance is ZERO ( I have not heard so much as a word from them since sending the Note as of Jan 23)
You speak of honor when in fact the Banks as well as the Judiciary are always in dishonor, as in this loan from the bank, when finding out after the fact that added "Ryder's" to the contract without my knowledge in that they gave me NO Consideration in this Contract, and DID NOT give full disclosure, which therefore rendered the contract null and void, which WILL be my defense if they should NOT except my P.N., which will most likely will be the case. I have no delusion's as to their wanting my ass in court ,but believe me I will be well armed when facing their "Star Chamber". chances are I will lose this case but not without a fight, and not because I'm right ,but because the judge will most likely ignore the rule of law, in favor of the Corporation, which is always the case in a court of Admiralty Law.
However K1W1 was somewhat skeptical of Xabre's motives, implying that he was just another deadbeat trying to get something for nothing;
I paid my mortgage with a promissory note - 5 months 1 week ago
kIwI
Xabre wrote:
I Was waiting for you to put your 2 cents worth in...and also knew that you would play the part of the opposition as it were.. as is always your route in these little issues.
I have in fact gone over the Bills of Exchange Act of Canada. and the Criminal Code of Canada, and the Banking Act of Canada, and the Canada Payment Association Procedure, and the fact is they DO NOT have to except my 100% legal Negotiable Instrument. but in sending my P.N. I sent a letter explaining that if they did not except it (which I fully expect they wont)then to explain in writing why they are exempt from the legislation, and if they did not then my balance is ZERO ( I have not heard so much as a word from them since sending the Note as of Jan 23)
You speak of honor when in fact the Banks as well as the Judiciary are always in dishonor, as in this loan from the bank, when finding out after the fact that added "Ryder's" to the contract without my knowledge in that they gave me NO Consideration in this Contract, and DID NOT give full disclosure, which therefore rendered the contract null and void, which WILL be my defense if they should NOT except my P.N., which will most likely will be the case. I have no delusion's as to their wanting my ass in court ,but believe me I will be well armed when facing their "Star Chamber". chances are I will lose this case but not without a fight, and not because I'm right ,but because the judge will most likely ignore the rule of law, in favor of the Corporation, which is always the case in a court of Admiralty Law.
Ha! I knew the word you wanted was except rather than accept… that’s just classic.
So evidently my summary of how you’ve acted in business was correct -- or at least you haven’t tried to deny it, have only tried to justify it with a lot of babbling bullshit.
The reason you’re going to lose at court (and no one needs be prescient to see that happening) is because you get your defence from some Joe Public like that talking skull with his arrow infested whiteboard in the video VNTT keeps posting up, from people who have no obligation to give valid information and are at liberty to make up any sort of shit they want, and because you’d ignore any professional advice that doesn‘t square with your pet theory. Have you even bothered to consult a chartered accountant or commercial lawyer about your situation and the theory you plan to use to defend it?
The fact that you’ll invariable lose due to your invalid defence does not make the court that finds against you a Star Chamber. In the Star Chamber, a defendant didn’t get to make any sort of defence of themselves, not even a valid one -- and you’d be coming out of it with your nose and ears clipped off your face. As for the “Admiralty court” nonsense… you can believe you’re a ship at berth all you want but it’s hardly going to help your case, so best you keep that particular belief in the privacy of your own mind, eh.
You say, correctly, they are under no obligation to accept your worthless promissory note (and worthless because you have no intention of actually keeping the promise you’re trying to make) but then you’ve sent a letter demanding to know why they won’t accept it. Furthermore, you expect your “balance to be zero” if they don’t give you an explanation that is acceptable to you. You really are a piece of work, young Xabre.
You say the bank didn’t give you full disclosure, but what you mean is that they didn’t know about your ignorance, that they assumed you knew something when in fact you didn’t. Perhaps you believe they can read your mind. Perhaps you want everyone to presume you’re ignorant about everything and therefore need to be told about everything that happens to you… just like a child. Like I already asked: Is there any reason the bank should have presumed you were ignorant about how they create credit when you went to it and asked for some; is there any reason why they shouldn‘t have believed you were fully cognisant and agreeable to it since you were asking for some? Did you even query them about it at the time?
Xabre, you do a great impression of a child somnambulist stumbling about and dreaming you’re lucid and grown up. You know, I’d almost feel sorry for you and the situation you’ve created for yourself if it wasn’t for the fact I’ve actually had to deal with c***s like you in business. As it is, if I could have it my way, I’d like to see you get your nose and ears clipped off as a lesson and a warning for others to avoid doing business with you. So you should be thankful you’ve got the court to protect you from people like me.
Own nothing, owe nothing…
Which generated this straight from the heart response;
I paid my mortgage with a promissory note - 5 months 1 week ago
Xabre
KIWI You RAT FUCK...It is blatantly obvious you are in fact a Prick of the highest order...YOU care not of the "Freeman Movement" but forwarding your sick venom. You use this platform to forward your own twisted agenda. You are not about rule of law, or honesty in business, but in the STATUS QUA, you sir are about Big Brother and the Orwellian subjugation of the masses, You Mother Fucker!I Know your Fucking game, and I always tried to give you the benefit of the doubt...but it matters not, because whether right or wrong YOU will always side with the norm and NOT the poor bastards trying to free themselves from what is clearly the Uber elite Fucking over the little guy. You are the Zenith of Big brother, the Apex of NWO shit. Meta was right about you, thats why you helped get him banned because he had your Fucking number PERIOD! He knew the shit you were trying to pull so your and your limp dick cohorts had him fucking Shit Canned!
Let me tell YOU something Kiwi Ive done enough research to know that when I go to court I will throw a major Fuck into those Judicial bastards because I HAVE DONE MY HOMEWORK. I will stand tall and win.,because I'm using THEIR LAW AGAINST THEM!!!
So Fuck you KIWI you are IMO a two faced ,Statist Bastard and I for one will no longer acknowledge your outright BULLSHIT, You are everything the Freeman movement is against!. What your doing here is beyond me, as your nothing but A SHILL and Fucking Troll...So Fuck you and the NAG you road in on!!!
Touchy, touchy Xabre. I hope that wasn't the attitude you took to court. But, on the plus side for these two combatants, our Quatloos debates are palid, bloodless bunfights when compared to the vigorous debate with which they express their convictions over at the WFS!
By the way the guy that K1W1 is talking about in this comment;
The reason you’re going to lose at court (and no one needs be prescient to see that happening) is because you get your defence from some Joe Public like that talking skull with his arrow infested whiteboard in the video VNTT keeps posting up
Is this really, really creepy guy who calls himself "Eternally Aware";
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztpBRUkKsrw
He's like a talking robot in an undershirt.
