Lose The Name: Kate of Gaia & Cult Followers

[Burnaby49]

Thanks for that news. I was concerned the guy would become a defacto Canadian just because he was willing to sit in jail forever. The last I read on his case he was still the mystery man. Now that he's ID'd we still have to try and kick him out but at least the most critical step has been made by figuring out who the hell he is.

[Wake Up! Productions]

Thanks for that news. I was concerned the guy would become a defacto Canadian just because he was willing to sit in jail forever. The last I read on his case he was still the mystery man. Now that he's ID'd we still have to try and kick him out but at least the most critical step has been made by figuring out who the hell he is.

He was deported last August.

[Burnaby49]

Thanks for that news. I was concerned the guy would become a defacto Canadian just because he was willing to sit in jail forever. The last I read on his case he was still the mystery man. Now that he's ID'd we still have to try and kick him out but at least the most critical step has been made by figuring out who the hell he is.

He was deported last August.

Even better. I thought I read more recently that he was still getting free room and board at her majesty's pleasure. Obviously wrong.

[NYGman]

But it makes the point that the lack of a name will not prevent you from being convicted of a crime, even if you don't believe in the crime, or fail to give your name.

[Burnaby49]

But it makes the point that the lack of a name will not prevent you from being convicted of a crime, even if you don't believe in the crime, or fail to give your name.

Agreed. My positing was not to point and was nothing more than an elderly irritable taxpayer venting at footing the bill for his last decade.

[Wake Up! Productions]

This has got to be the dumbest "phone call video" I have ever seen/heard:

Maryland vital records *agrees that it is illegal to use legal names and birth certificates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct5ZKHQ46Vo

*There is no such agreement, merely more freeman garbage forcing his will upon a polite civil servant.

[Wake Up! Productions]

STOP THE PRESSESS !!! Robert Menard Debunks Kate of Gaia in new video !!!

Illegal to use Legal Name??? NO! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3v7s7pO-Is

[arayder]

STOP THE PRESSESS !!! Robert Menard Debunks Kate of Gaia in new video !!!

Illegal to use Legal Name??? NO! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3v7s7pO-Is

Bobby says Kate is an idiot but at the end of the video repeats his own laughable "security of the person" argument which can be refuted in the same way Bobby refutes Kate's "lose the name" argument. . .by checking the case law.

You can't make this stuff up, folks.

[pigpot]

The basic claim is that governments have tricked everybody into their jurisdiction.

Not at all.

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

I think that is more what the basic claim is about if one is to be exact. A "FOTL" I am not, although it interested me up until the words Sovereign Citizen were used and it was clearly juxtaposed. But the above quote is clearly what Marc Stevens approach concerns itself with from what I have read. Marc is clearly not a "FOTL" and although this is another posters point of view from my angle it succinctly expresses Marc's point of view in my eyes.

[Wake Up! Productions]

The basic claim is that governments have tricked everybody into their jurisdiction.

Not at all.

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

I think that is more what the basic claim is about if one is to be exact. A "FOTL" I am not, although it interested me up until the words Sovereign Citizen were used and it was clearly juxtaposed. But the above quote is clearly what Marc Stevens approach concerns itself with from what I have read. Marc is clearly not a "FOTL" and although this is another posters point of view from my angle it succinctly expresses Marc's point of view in my eyes.

You are correct, Marc Stevens is not a "FOTL", he is an anarchist. Anarchists very often share the same views as freemen. Dean Clifford, in my opinion, is 50% anarchist and 50% freeman (and 100% prison inmate). Kate of Gaia used to be a freeman, but has since disavowed freemanism. Kate now leans towards anarchism, but even more so leans toward anti-monarchy. The point being, they are all fleas on the same stray dog.

[arayder]

The basic claim is that governments have tricked everybody into their jurisdiction.

Not at all.

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

I think that is more what the basic claim is about if one is to be exact. A "FOTL" I am not, although it interested me up until the words Sovereign Citizen were used and it was clearly juxtaposed. But the above quote is clearly what Marc Stevens approach concerns itself with from what I have read. Marc is clearly not a "FOTL" and although this is another posters point of view from my angle it succinctly expresses Marc's point of view in my eyes.

Pigpot, my quote, which you conveniently took out of context refers to Kate of Gia, the subject of the thread, not Stevens or his insanity. You can tell what the subject of the thread is by reading the big letters at the very beginning of the thread. I know you can do it!

The next time you are around a literate adult have that person read Kate's legal name theory to you and you will see that Kate believes the trickery starts at one's birth.

If you would like I can find a coloring book activity which might help you grasp the idea.

[pigpot]

The basic claim is that governments have tricked everybody into their jurisdiction.

Not at all.

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

I think that is more what the basic claim is about if one is to be exact. A "FOTL" I am not, although it interested me up until the words Sovereign Citizen were used and it was clearly juxtaposed. But the above quote is clearly what Marc Stevens approach concerns itself with from what I have read. Marc is clearly not a "FOTL" and although this is another posters point of view from my angle it succinctly expresses Marc's point of view in my eyes.

Pigpot, my quote, which you conveniently took out of context refers to Kate of Gia, the subject of the thread, not Stevens or his insanity. You can tell what the subject of the thread is by reading the big letters at the very beginning of the thread. I know you can do it!

The next time you are around a literate adult have that person read Kate's legal name theory to you and you will see that Kate believes the trickery starts at one's birth.

If you would like I can find a coloring book activity which might help you grasp the idea.

Regardless of your insults and childish behaviour, you might wish to respond to the

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

quote. Can you address these points?

[Burnaby49]

I've been trying to allow Pigpot to post when he at least makes some sense or isn't being grossly offensive (there have been a few of those I've disapproved). It doesn't help matters if, in the few posts I allow, posters go after him like bait. Because of this I've allowed his last response. But if he's civil, even if to some extent off topic, let him be. We all know he's a Marc Stevens fantic and he tries to bring that into the discussions when he can but I'm keeping my eye on that.

[arayder]

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

Can you address these points?

Why don't you ask the nearest adult how silly and hypocritical you are to presume the authority to compel me to answer while inferring you are some sort of freedom seeker?

[Jeffrey]

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Well pigpot, you were lucky enough to be born in a Republic and in a Republic authority, as explained by Thomas Jefferson comes from:

The first principle of republicanism is that the lex majoris partis is the fundamental law of every society of individuals of equal rights; to consider the will of the society enounced by the majority of a single vote as sacred as if unanimous is the first of all lessons in importance

where else will [we]... find the origin of just powers, if not in the majority of the society?

Jefferson got that bright idea because he spent too much time reading John Locke:

it is fit every one who enjoys his share of the protection should pay out of his estate his proportion for the maintenance of it. But still it must be with his own consent – i. e., the consent of the majority, giving it either by themselves or their representatives chosen by them

-Second treatise on government
http://lonang.com/library/reference/loc ... t/loc-211/

[pigpot]

Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have?
Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else?
Who had the authority to tell anybody what to do?
And when did they delegate this authority to those who call themselves government?

Can you address these points?

Why don't you ask the nearest adult how silly and hypocritical you are to presume the authority to compel me to answer while inferring you are some sort of freedom seeker?

Can you show me where I mentioned compelling anyone to do anything? This is exactly the response I expected here and you just confirmed my thoughts on your aggression. This is my point. I have no problems with defensive force but I always apply the non-aggression principle and I don't compel anyone to do anything. Re-read your post and look at how you look. I'll tell you your problem "arayder" and it's simple. I've challenged you and "jargonbuster" all over the internet to argue (adult fashion and without insults) with me one to one but you are reluctant to do so. I think I know why that is but we can leave it at that if you don't want to. No insults from me and no cursive language either as noted by "Burnaby49". It'll continue to stay that way as well.

[pigpot]

WHENCE COMES AUTHORITY?

Well pigpot, you were lucky enough to be born in a Republic and in a Republic authority, as explained by Thomas Jefferson comes from:

The first principle of republicanism is that the lex majoris partis is the fundamental law of every society of individuals of equal rights; to consider the will of the society enounced by the majority of a single vote as sacred as if unanimous is the first of all lessons in importance

where else will [we]... find the origin of just powers, if not in the majority of the society?

Jefferson got that bright idea because he spent too much time reading John Locke:

it is fit every one who enjoys his share of the protection should pay out of his estate his proportion for the maintenance of it. But still it must be with his own consent – i. e., the consent of the majority, giving it either by themselves or their representatives chosen by them

-Second treatise on government
http://lonang.com/library/reference/loc ... t/loc-211/

Thank you for your reply. I still think you are missing my point. I'll try again. Why should anyone be forced to pay for a collective protection when they can do so privately? Why again would you want to use force and if so is it based upon a sound moral ground?

[pigpot]

I've been trying to allow Pigpot to post when he at least makes some sense or isn't being grossly offensive (there have been a few of those I've disapproved). It doesn't help matters if, in the few posts I allow, posters go after him like bait. Because of this I've allowed his last response. But if he's civil, even if to some extent off topic, let him be. We all know he's a Marc Stevens fantic and he tries to bring that into the discussions when he can but I'm keeping my eye on that.

Thank you. But just to correct an assumption made above. I am not a Marc Stevens fanatic. I agree with much of what Marc says but not all and have in the past had disagreements with him over certain things. Cursive language being one of them. Here like over on Marc's site I have been asked to refrain from such like and I gladly refrain. I'd ask that if someone can show me where I posted (on this site) any cursive words please. I do get tired with the ad hominem attacks here so thank you for acknowledging that "Burnaby49". I think if given the chance to post normally you'd find that you might get a tolerant but logical opposition to the points of view held here. If you can't stomach logic though...... well.....

[SteveUK]

this has the makings of another filibuster, like that legendary GOODF/PoE thread where you wrote to yourself all night.

[Jeffrey]

Why should anyone be forced to pay for a collective protection

To avoid freeloaders that benefit from collective protection without paying for it.

Why again would you want to use force and if so is it based upon a sound moral ground

Because without force it's futile and yes, majority consent is sound moral ground.