Domestic Extremists - Freemen on the Land

[Wetcoaster]

CSIS has identified as domestic extremists and perhaps domestic terrorists (think Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing in the US) - a group known as Freemen on the Land who claim to not recognize Canadian government authority.

The sovereign citizen movements which includes Freemen on the Land is active in Canada, US and UK.

"Freemen on the land" are people who claim that all statute law is contractual, and that such law is applicable only if an individual consents to be governed by it. They believe that they can therefore declare themselves independent of government jurisdiction, holding that the only "true" law is common law, as they define it. The "Freeman on the land" movement has its origins in various United States-based groups in the 1970s and 1980s, reaching the United Kingdom soon after 2000. The phrase "Freeman-on-the-Land" (FOTL) first appeared around 2004 and was coined by Robert Arthur Menard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

In the UK the movement has been claiming that it need not pay debts based on some rather bizarre quasi-legal mumbo jumbo. The Freemen believe that if you change your name and deny the jurisdiction of the courts, you will be able to escape your debt, taxes and even criminal charges. As the Freemen claim "if you don't consent to be that "person", you step outside the system".

http://www.guardian....egy-bullet-debt

And here in Canada it is seen as a policing problem with possibility for violence.

An anti-government movement known as Freeman on the Land has become a 'major policing problem' in several provinces, according to a threat assessment by Canada's spy officials.

The report by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service lists Freeman members among 'domestic extremists' who associate with issue-based causes, such as environmentalism, anti-capitalism, anti-globalization and far-right racism.

Its adherents fall on both the left and right wings of the political spectrum, but "at the core" of the movement is the belief that "government operates outside of its legal jurisdiction and therefore Freeman members do not recognize the authority of national, provincial, or municipal laws, policies or regulations," says the report, titled Canada: Biannual Update on Terrorist and Extremist Threats, which was prepared in April and released under federal access-to-information laws.

"Freeman members now constitute a major policing problem in several provinces and have occasionally engaged in acts of violence against the police," the report states.

In various videos posted online, supporters of the Freeman movement in Canada - including outspoken advocate Robert Menard - reject any association with violent extremism and insist they are "peaceful and loving."

Law enforcement officials are not convinced.

A national RCMP spokeswoman said Friday that the force is working with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police to develop materials for front-line officers to increase their awareness and understanding of the Freeman movement and its followers.

"Individuals associated to this movement are a concern because some followers advocate violence to promote their views and this may involve violence toward police officers," Sgt. Julie Gagnon said in an email. "There are officer safety concerns when dealing with followers of this movement during routine police interaction."

Last month, the Anti-Defamation League published a report that described the so-called "sovereign citizen movement" as "one of the most problematic domestic extremist movements in the United States," attracting mostly middle-aged or older men who are financially stressed, angry at government regulation or who want "something for nothing."

The report cited the 2010 shooting deaths of two West Memphis, Ark., police officers during a traffic stop. The suspects, a father and son who were later killed in a shootout with police, belonged to the sovereign citizen movement.

Earlier this year, a Nova Scotia jury convicted a man of uttering a threat to kill police officers and for multiple firearms offences. Court records state that Daren McCormick, a Freeman on the Land follower, told an officer that he could outdraw police and that if a police cruiser ever pulled up in his yard, he'd kill the officers. When police moved to arrest him the following day, they found him with a loaded .44-calibre revolver in a holster strapped to his hip.

McCormick asserted that the doctrines of Freeman on the Land free him from the Criminal Code, including its gun laws, and that he was free to carry a gun even to go grocery shopping, according to the records. He also claimed his right to travel highways without a licence or registration.

Last year, RCMP officials in B.C. issued a bulletin to officers urging them to be cautious when dealing with suspected Freemen because of their belief in the right to use force in defence of their land, property and family.

The bulletin said some followers may refer to themselves using the phrase "of the family," such as "John of the Family Smith," or claim to be a "Son of God."

They also may present to officers a document that they believe exempts them from the authority of the police and entitles them to charge fees if they are detained. "Subjects make continued use of nonsensical legal/quasi-legal jargon," the bulletin said.

Some Canadian judges have expressed frustration with Freemen tying up the court system.

In September, John Rooke, associate chief justice of the Court of Queen's Bench in Alberta, issued a scathing ruling against a self-described Freeman, Dennis Larry Meads, for holding up his divorce proceedings by making "bluntly idiotic" arguments.

At one point, court records state, after the judge informed Meads of the basics of family law proceedings, Meads replied that "there are rules above man's rules, and God's laws is where your laws originated from."

The judge characterized the "gurus" behind the Freeman on the Land and similar movements as "nothing more than "con men," who pitch distorted world views on followers through seminars, books, websites and DVDs.

http://www.canada.co...l#ixzz2GU3Tf5Oi

[Electro Rock]

It's good thing CSIS has managed to get a handle on all the major league organized crime, Chinese technology theives, foreign subversionists, etc in this country, so that they were able to devote resources towards tackling these nobodies.

[Wetcoaster]

It's good thing CSIS has managed to get a handle on all the major league organized crime, Chinese technology theives, foreign subversionists, etc in this country, so that they were able to devote resources towards tackling these nobodies.

[Buddhas Hand]

Anyone who has followed the exploits of the Canadian Intelligence Security Service should have noted that CSIS for the most part are neither possessed of intelligence nor seem to provide much in the way of services to ensure the security of Canadians.

For example:

/topic/311916-oops-pardon-my-cloak-and-dagger/">http://forum.canucks...oak-and-dagger/

[canucks since 77]

I'll wager they have their own lawyers also.

[Wetcoaster]

I'll wager they have their own lawyers also.

[canucks since 77]

But if their willing to pay, there will always be a lawyer.Cash first, ethics second.

[Wetcoaster]

But if their willing to pay, there will always be a lawyer.Cash first, ethics second.

[key2thecup]

It's good thing CSIS has managed to get a handle on all the major league organized crime, Chinese technology theives, foreign subversionists, etc in this country, so that they were able to devote resources towards tackling these nobodies.

[darkpoet]

The fact the government has "labeled these people as domestic extremists" just lends credence to their plight.

The media spin regarding alleged "violence associated with these groups" is also ridiculous. They spin "anti-government" into "drug addicted loser nutjob who wants to blow up banks and cause anarchy" - when the fact of the matter is it's exactly the opposite (big surprise)

Canada is a common law jurisdiction. Fact.

All these folks are doing is learning exactly what that means, and then applying that knowledge to the machination of their lives.

"Freemen on the land" are people who claim that all statute law is contractual, and that such law is applicable only if an individual consents to be governed by it.

[Salmonberries]

Good luck to em.

[canuck_trevor16]

How serious are they anyway? I doubt every canadian will stand behind them........they have not been labeled domestic terrorism yet

[Wetcoaster]

How serious are they anyway? I doubt every canadian will stand behind them........they have not been labeled domestic terrorism yet

[Buddhas Hand]

The vast majority of cases I have seen has Freemen representing themselves since the supposed legal justifications do not exist and lawyers need at least something to base a defence upon.

The Law Society generally takes a dim view of lawyers making completely baseless wack-a-doodle arguments.

[Buddhas Hand]

Nope. That has not been my considerable personal experience.

[AllHailSmyl]

I had an experience dealing with one of these Freemen....needless to say after about 30 seconds of talking to him I walked away from his brainwashing information lesson on life.

[theminister]

So, Wet, just supposing someone actually did want to go the right way about declaring themselves free of the state, is there any legal recourse under canadian law? If you were to advise?

[Wetcoaster]

Thats why here in Australia when you are trying to to make lawyers accountable for their actions , you are actually fighting their insurance companies , and when you prove wrongdoing they nearly always settle out of court , there is no record of their transgression , the only penalty they seem to recieve is an increase in the insurance premiums .

And that is my experience in these matters

[Wetcoaster]

So, Wet, just supposing someone actually did want to go the right way about declaring themselves free of the state, is there any legal recourse under canadian law? If you were to advise?

[Wetcoaster]

Are Lawyers Ethical?

By Lance Winslow

...

This is how a lawyer can justify their criminality or decisions to hide in the shawdows of the gray area of law and proclaim themselves members of a noble and ethical profession and slayers of evil as they enforce the laws for the betterment of the whole of our civilization. Of course all their talk and boloney is pure and utter hokum, but it is nice to know where they are coming from as the refute Caesars best advice; "the first thing we do is kill all the lawyers!" In fact if lawyers were as ethical as they say, we would not have to kill them, as they would kill themselves to save our civilization from their obvious attacks on the truth and our laws. Think on it.