Love Letter to WestJet Employees

[Huge Hammer]

Hey Rob

Nobody accused you of theft. I certainly hope you do not have a guilt conscience on this.

I am suprised a freeman would travel as those hi-ways do not pay for themselves and it seems like you would be too principled to use sometyhing that you have not contributed to.

I do think your ilk are a bunch of freeloaders. The discussion on your forum regarding avoiding debt collectors was hilarious.

As I said before, whatever anyone wants to believe is fine with me and I am happy when someone wants to contribute to positive change in society.

However the overwhelming majority of freeloaders seem to be petty people with a personal grudge who have found like minded people to nurture their grudge.

[tiggermoth]

Freeman, I have been avoiding this topic as I wanted to give you folks a fair chance. Now I have had enough

Have you renounced your Canadian citizenship?

This is a YES or NO question. You did not, and have not yet answered the question. YES or NO.

I would like to give you a quick story about myself. I have never been denied boarding an aircraft. I am free to go wherever, whenever, and however I want. I have never been "investigated" or "under surveillance" by any law enforcement. I have 3 lovely children who will grow up the same way. I am an aircraft owner myself, and am free to fly it whenever, wherever I want. I own my house, some property, and can do whatever I want with it. I do not feel any pressure from the government on anything, to do anything I do not want. How can I be so free to do whatever you are asking. You want to know how I can have so many freedoms, and how come I do not feel even the slightest bit opressed by ANYONE. I will tell you. I am proud to be CANADIAN!! I am proud to support my country, even if those in power have made mistakes. (So have all of us) I am proud to pay my taxes so that I can have good roads, good schooling for my kids. I am proud to hold numerous government issued forms of ID. I am Proud to be a FREE CANADIAN CITIZEN

You all should put away your doobies and crack pipes for a while, try my approach, and guess what, you will be allowed to fly westjet, or anyone else. You will be allowed to do whatever you want, whenever you want, be truly FREE, like me.

See it how you want, but you guys who are trying so hard to be Free men, are just screwing yourselves over.

[tiggermoth]

P.S. Just try to answer the damn question. Have you renounced your citizenship. YES or NO.

[tehmastermonk]

I alreay went over this whoe "who is the child/who is the freeloader"with some on here Rob,and I think i hit a button, and thats what got thier backs up. in some of my longer posts i
answered thier questions in great detail and directly. They missed the answer totaly and one guy even said he refused to read long posts.\

To each thier own,you people at west jet have families to worry about. Wives and husbands to consider.So do freemen. We arent here to convert you guys, this is not a religeon.
You asked some questions, answers were given, and things grew from there.We simply shared the answeres we have, disturbing as they may be, and recieved the usual response to a frustrated mind, that is, ridicule, and accusations and all that.

deconstruct my post on jurisdictions. pick it apart word for word, i challenge any of you, even other freemen, go ahead, find its flaws.

once you start to break it down and compare it to your life, you start to realize the logic, then go read our answers again.You wont be saying we are evading answers or twisting hte law to our convenience, or any of these other things.

Instead you will realize that it is THEY that have twisted the words, and used it to THIER convenience, while they hand you a cookie and a diaper once in a while so you think you are all good to go.

[denkauto]

The truth here Freeman is that a small segment of society will expend huge amounts of effort exploiting loopholes and omissions in the written language to avoid paying for a cup of coffee. That's you. You're not enlightened, you're a drain on society.

Very funny, and so true, I think the unfortunate truth is that there will always be people like this in society. There is not a whole lot we can do about them; they think they are sticking it to the man. They have yet to realize the man never pays; we are "the man", us contributing citizens, the same ones you are saying to wave at and love. You are screwing us, not any government.

Please be a freeman-off-the-land, tie some barrels together and float away. But you would not do that would you. That would make it real, that would make it hard.

[Widow]

I do not know what you mean by the term 'citizen' and thus cannot answer it. <snip>
But as I said, it is your word, and you have not shared what it means to you

Yes we have!

Just as "supper" and "eat" are common words, so is "citizen", and with generally accepted definitions such as "a member of a political community" where such membership entitles the bearer to certain rights and holds them to to certain obligations.

In this case, we are talking about "Canadian Citizenship", as defined by the "Citizenship Act" of Canada.

So, are you or are you not a citizen of Canada, as defined by the Act?
Have you, or have you not renounced said citizenship, if, in fact, you once held it?

And we do mean "renounced" as defined in the Act.

7. A person who is a citizen shall not cease to be a citizen except in accordance with this Part or regulations made under paragraph 27(j.1).

R.S., 1985, c. C-29, s. 7; 2008, c. 14, s. 5.

8. [Repealed, 2008, c. 14, s. 6]

Renunciation of citizenship

9. (1) A citizen may, on application, renounce his citizenship if he

(a) is a citizen of a country other than Canada or, if his application is accepted, will become a citizen of a country other than Canada;

(b) is not the subject of a declaration by the Governor in Council made pursuant to section 20;

(c) is not a minor;

(d) is not prevented from understanding the significance of renouncing citizenship by reason of the person having a mental disability; and

(e) does not reside in Canada.

And one more time:

The Government of Canada maintains the list, which is provided to airlines in secure form. Under the identity-screening regulations, airlines are required to screen each person’s name against the specified-persons list for any person who appears to be 12 years of age or older before issuing a boarding pass.

The person shall be screened by comparing the name on government issued ID to the name on the ticket/boarding pass AND to the specified persons list. As they shall (must) compare, in order to complete the screening process, you cannot be screened without government issued ID. If you cannot be screened, you cannot be approved boarding.

You may well get them to make a formal exception, or rewrite the rules so that they are clearer to those who are unable to understand. But the intent of the rules as written are clear to anyone with Grade 5 comprehension.

[mdscientist61]

I am Canadian. Is that not enough?
I am a Freeman-on-the-Land. It means I have revoked consent to be governed.

Rob

Hey Rob,
here is something I was thinking about.

In the woods near my house there are some deer and raccoons.
They live free on the land.
They have not given their consent to be governed.
And yet there they are, living their whole furry little lives under the umbrella of the Canadian Wildlife Act.
No question about that.

You say you have revoked your consent to be governed.

However, as a human person, who is in Canada at the present time, you are most certainly inside the jurisdiction of the Criminal Code of Canada.

It certainly seems to me that you are being governed in that aspect with or without your consent right there, Rob.

Can you tell us your thoughts about that, Rob?

[flystraightin]

I find it funny that people who have never studied law, statute interpretation or trained their brain with LSAT's will argue about what is in an Act or regulations....

Rob,

Have you "studied law, statute interpretation or trained...with LSAT's[?]"

[Brewguy]

The funy thing is I know a number of lawyers, one is a very close friend... and none of my lawyer friends are 'freemen'.

If what you lot say is true, you'd think that they (and each and every other lawyer in the world) would all be into this stuff, avoiding taxes, etc. and getting their clients out of just about any and every problem with your loopholes.

Are the vast majority of you 'freemen' lawyers?
...As they would obviously know how to interpret all this legalese.

[tehmastermonk]

Hey Rob

Nobody accused you of theft. I certainly hope you do not have a guilt conscience on this.

I am suprised a freeman would travel as those hi-ways do not pay for themselves and it seems like you would be too principled to use sometyhing that you have not contributed to.

I do think your ilk are a bunch of freeloaders. The discussion on your forum regarding avoiding debt collectors was hilarious.

As I said before, whatever anyone wants to believe is fine with me and I am happy when someone wants to contribute to positive change in society.

However the overwhelming majority of freeloaders seem to be petty people with a personal grudge who have found like minded people to nurture their grudge.

you are half right there hammer.


i do agree there are those on that forum that want to escape contract legaly but not honourably or lawfuly. remeber thought as i said before,Rob does not necissarily agree with all the things posted there. that forum is for free open discussion wihtout the "forum poice" coming around quenching the opinions of noobs.

many posters tehre are engaging in that discussion to learn before they leap out.

so they are testing it with petty shit of minimal conmsequence to see if what we say is correct. you should see some of my earleir posts on that thread! boy did i start a fuss a few times! i was worse than you!


so i totaly uderstand your perception however it is one sided. you may be reading the post of a few noobies, or eccentrics. every crowd of friends has a strange one in the bunch. i wrote a thread on thinkfreeforums.org about this very topic, i called it,, gahh!! what about honour!

and that got a few people upset. not everyone in this society is the exact same view and approach. there is more than one way to skin a cat! heck, there might even be a conspiracy theorist or two on there.. i dont know, but we love to poke fun at alex jones.


so please dont let that speak for the whole.Not all of us are dorks.

[tehmastermonk]

The funy thing is I know a number of lawyers, one is a very close friend... and none of my lawyer friends are 'freemen'.

If what you lot say is true, you'd think that they (and each and every other lawyer in the world) would all be into this stuff, avoiding taxes, etc. and getting their clients out of just about any and every problem with your loopholes.

Are the vast majority of you 'freemen' lawyers?
...As they would obviously know how to interpret all this legalese.

are you kidding me? lawyers cant stnd us because we almost never need them! why? because we know how to stay out of court! and yes they do get into this stuff.. they tried activley to shut this all down a few times, theing is though, we are right and they cant do nothing about it! but they would if they could! i know this because they tried! as for avoiding taxes and morgages what do you think lawyers do? pay for thier house? no...

they do something called accepted for value, and reverse the trust on thier home and steal the title deed right out of the mortgage comanys hands, and discharge the debt! and claim the abandoned funds thier signature generates later on! scamers! teh lot! they dont dare tell you what they do cos its not right.

i can tell you stories... and yes i know a paralegal, two of them in fact, and they see things...

anyhow no wonder you got these opinions... they are not your opinions they are your lawyer buddies opinions imposed upon you

go ahead as them what acceptence and accepted for value is all about.

[tehmastermonk]

I am Canadian. Is that not enough?
I am a Freeman-on-the-Land. It means I have revoked consent to be governed.

Rob

Hey Rob,
here is something I was thinking about.

In the woods near my house there are some deer and raccoons.
They live free on the land.
They have not given their consent to be governed.
And yet there they are, living their whole furry little lives under the umbrella of the Canadian Wildlife Act.
No question about that.

You say you have revoked your consent to be governed.

However, as a human person, who is in Canada at the present time, you are most certainly inside the jurisdiction of the Criminal Code of Canada.

It certainly seems to me that you are being governed in that aspect with or without your consent right there, Rob.

Can you tell us your thoughts about that, Rob?

actually if you listened to anything Rob said, we are NOT above the rule of law infact, we actualt WANT the rule of law to preside over canada. statutory laws are for coerperations, not ruling Nations.

[tehmastermonk]

I find it funny that people who have never studied law, statute interpretation or trained their brain with LSAT's will argue about what is in an Act or regulations....

Rob,

Have you "studied law, statute interpretation or trained...with LSAT's[?]"

in fact he has. i know Rob has over 17000 hours in. I myself only about 2000. enough to know my corner of the world.we could give you guys links if you want to LSAT tests.

[Rockie]

I do not know what you mean by the term 'citizen' and thus cannot answer it.

You're either lying or you are not smart enough to be left alone without competent adult supervision. Personally I think you're lying, which is why I also think you're a total fraud.

[mdscientist61]

actually if you listened to anything Rob said, we are NOT above the rule of law infact, we actualt WANT the rule of law to preside over canada. statutory laws are for coerperations, not ruling Nations.

Hello Master Monk,

OK, so you're setting up the Freemen of the Land Rule of Law.

So under the Freeman Laws of the Land, you will set up a Freeman Government, yes?

Will you have two parties in the Freeman Congress, such as the Freeman Liberal Party and the Freeman Conservative Party? Or will you make it a one-party only sytem like the former USSR?

Also a Freeman Police Force to enforce the Freeman Laws of the Land?

What about the Freemen who freely choose not to pay their Freemand Taxes?

Will the be Arrested by the Freeman Police and thrown in the Freeman Jail? Then they would be Freeman Prisoners? Yes?

[tehmastermonk]

actually if you listened to anything Rob said, we are NOT above the rule of law infact, we actualt WANT the rule of law to preside over canada. statutory laws are for coerperations, not ruling Nations.

Hello Master Monk,

OK, so you're setting up the Freemen of the Land Rule of Law.

So under the Freeman Laws of the Land, you will set up a Freeman Government, yes?

Will you have two parties in the Freeman Congress, such as the Freeman Liberal Party and the Freeman Conservative Party? Or will you make it a one-party only sytem like the former USSR?

Also a Freeman Police Force to enforce the Freeman Laws of the Land?

What about the Freemen who freely choose not to pay their Freemand Taxes?

Will the be Arrested by the Freeman Police and thrown in the Freeman Jail? Then they would be Freeman Prisoners? Yes?

fair questions, WFS(World Freeman Societey) is global and has chapters all through out the commonwealth. We have no intentions of inventing our own laws. The rule of law is universal,
wich all religions, cultures, societeys and nations can embrace, and has already been expresesed in written form.

Once again you must make the distincion between law forms. i dont mean a piece of paper that you fill out, i mean forms as in types. Statutory law, is a form of law that does not relate to crimes. it deals in statues, ande depends on the consent of the consent of those governed
to have validity. Notice i did not say the majority consent. Democracy is not what establishes statutory law, but simply the consent of those governed, and all those silent are presumed to consent tacitly.

WFS accepts and recognizes Maritime/Admiralty and common law jurisdictions. as well as civil law(not civil statutes) in the form to torts. We do not write our own laws.

Statutory law has nothing to do with the rule of law upon wich our nation was founded.

[tehmastermonk]

will we set up a freeman government with a tax system? nope. we are a societey. again make the distinctions. does The Elizabeth Fry Society have thier own congress and taxes and currency?? do they need these things to be a societey? i think the definition of for what constitutes a society has been expressed already in this forum.

our common goal is, a free-er and more just societey. things like that russian thatgot tazered at the airport, and how those cops are under review but its all lip service. you all know this. nothing will happen to those cops. Even though they were offered an interpeter that spoke russian, they told him to step aside, clearly establishing they werent there to establish peace. they were there to kick ass.

WFS long term goal is to establish within out societey the recognized authority and power to investigate government, and police outside thier own organization, and to keep those in power in check with the rule of law and to not taser people for mereley asking questions.
and i will clearify, we do now want power to unseat government. we do not want power to uninstall or remove governments. only the power to investigate and to report the facts un altered to the public in an expression they can understand, and let the people decide if they want to consent to that government the investigation is complete.

We are not anti government though it seems like it at first glance. we are anto corruption, and we can not in good conscience consent to a country that is run like a business and not a nation.

We do not advocate rebellion againsst lawful authority. however the scales are being tipped too far on the heavy handed side. WFS wants to see cops like those that comited murder to that russian, face the same courts that you or i would face, and face the same penalties we would face as under common law, and the rule of law, equality before the law is paramount and manditory.

We are not cop haters either(at least those in positions of responsibility within WFS).
would you not feel safer if the cops had to give account outside a system of pre determined outcomes based on closing escrow on an account for a corperation?

We have an offer to benefit societey, by providing the public a service in the form of external investigation of police officers since the military has declined this duty.

I personaly would love to see the military take this responsibility and investigate cops and appear before military courts, but alas, wont happen.

WE the people have to ensure the saftey of our fellow man against some 23 year old cop on a power trip ready to tazer your kid for questioning his actions.

[flystraightin]

I find it funny that people who have never studied law, statute interpretation or trained their brain with LSAT's will argue about what is in an Act or regulations....

Rob,

Have you "studied law, statute interpretation or trained...with LSAT's[?]"

in fact he has. i know Rob has over 17000 hours in. I myself only about 2000. enough to know my corner of the world.we could give you guys links if you want to LSAT tests.

17000 hours of what? Measured by who? Does he have anything to show for these hours?

[tehmastermonk]

and how about you? have you studied law? as for what he has to show, he has a document that says he exists free from statutory law. and not to mention case law evidence of his hearings are documented somewhere.

if Rob chooses to show proof, would that help you or benefit you? Rob isnt here to impress you you know. if he shows that proof, you will accuse him of photoshop.

but i see you trying to get him into a position of testifying and verifying himself. for what? are you his judge? you gonna crucify him if he tells you to take a hike? or just call him more names? i mean really.

how many hours do you have in law? since you still cant tell between a law and a statute.

a statute needs consent. a law does not.

[Widow]

tehmastermonk,

Perhaps I can give you some insight into why the majority here (and elsewhere for similar reasons)will remain unconvinced.

There are a lot of rules in the aviation industry. Sure there are rules that folks don't like, but everyone recognizes that, for the most part, the rules are essential to managing safety in the skies. Not everyone can be trusted to always "do the right thing".

Now I'm going to repeat myself here, because either "your side" has missed it, or you've intentionally ignored my statement.

I consent to be governed by the force of law that rules the society in which I choose to live. In doing so, I am entitled to vote in the elections which decide who shall make decisions with respect to how I am governed.

I am not always happy with the choices my fellow citizens make, or the choices made by those who govern. But I have lived in other countries, and visited many others worldwide, and I do choose this country as mine.

By making this choice, I have not given up my right to object or to use the system and other methods in order to affect change.

I believe the right thing to do, is to make the choice. Either you are in, or you are out. It is not right to keep one foot in the door – and here is why.

The Freemen pick and choose the rules to which they will be subject. I believe this has the potential to be harmful to your fellow man. Many of the things to which you object I believe to be critical to living in a safe society. I find your philosophy to be both contradictory and hypocritical.

How do you tell a "real Freeman" from a wannabe, who is simply trying to use your ideology to NOT be responsible?

[tehmastermonk]

good question! i have raised that issue up before!

anyhow its simple. you know by the fruit. there is a divine law that we are all familiar with...

you reap what you sow, what comes around goes around, carma, several ways to express it.
the fakes that try to use this technology to escape responsibility tend to just copy and paste and operate off of someone elses templated documents and dont understand them for themself, and therby snare themself when it comes time to apply it into thier life, because they will reap what they sow.

now dont get me wrong, a beginner to all of this-of wich i still am in many ways-
will stil mess up too. how to tell a "noob" (for lack of a better term) from a fake?
by what he sows, you can get a hint into what he will reap.

meaning, (and i know this part sounds corny but its true) if your heart and intent is not in the right place and in line with equity, truth, honesty and honour, you will fail at these methods and find your sorry ass in jail, and in some cases, good for them.Because what is in your heart is all you have to sow. those are the seeds.a good man brings forth of his heart good things, and reaps the same.

irresponsible people have a tenacy to be lazy. and not research anything for themself to the point where its time to put it down on paper and serve it.

another way to know is when you meet them. see, anyone can be anything on the internet.
we do meet each other in real life from time to time, Rob is not the only one well versed in various things, and there are seminars in almost every major city in Canada.

an ovious one is of we meet a so-called freeman and he is on welfare. i would rather be oon the street with rights and duties intact than be treated like a child on welfare where i gotta attent these bullshit programs like how to get a job and tie your shoes, and shit like that.

so i guess the main mark of a responsible freeman is independance. we help each other where and when we can but no freeman will totaly rely on another that i have seen so far.

Honour is close behind that.

simply put the beauty of this is, anyone can get freedom, but only those deserving will keep it.
and we as a societey rerley need to deal wiht a rebel. we give them enough rope to hang themself.

[Widow]

And while the "false-hearted noob" is being given enough rope to hang himself, or even the "good-hearted-noob" is learning and making mistakes, are people - or "society as a whole" - never hurt in the process?

[tehmastermonk]

Nope. Not that I know of, to my knowledge, anyhow. now i suppose if the individual has a family to think about, that alone tends to keep his heart in check. unless they are both fools then the children could get hurt. is that what you are aiming at?


This is why we stress over and over.. before you serve notice, test the waters for yourself.
parking tickets, or other bullshit by-laws are a good place to start as worse case scenario you have to pay a fine. Talk to a cop or two, and get thier point of view.

no competent parent will just jump into this. i personaly dont have children or a wife, and i am happier that way. so i have that to my advantage.But there is that smal risk, yes. but the real issue is, would WFS be libel for anything? i mean if i read a religeous book that glorifies suicide, then go do it, could my family sue that author? what about parents that tried to sue bugs bunny?

this is really an interesting issue. lets pnder it some more.

[Widow]

It's not the "competent" people I'm worried about.

I was thinking along the lines of an unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured person/vehicle causing an accident and not having the money to pay the damages.

I am sure I could think up dozens of scenarios where someone/society could be hurt by the actions promoted by "you".

By the way:

The Elizabeth Fry Society have thier own congress and taxes and currency?? do they need these things to be a societey?

The Elizabeth Fry Society is a registered not-for profit organization, run by "board members". How can you compare yourselves?

[Rotten Apple #1]

I was outta here, but like a fly drawn to the light...

I won't define citizen/citizenship, I'll assume that the Free Men understand but play dumb. The fellow in this case here renounced his citizenship. I post the link as a guide for the Free Men.