Dean Kory - A Study in Free Living

Post by **notorial dissent** » Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:14 am

Gah!!!! What a lot of maundering meaningless gibberish.

Doesn't bode well for out boy in the weeks to come either I should say.

Post by **wserra** » Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:11 pm

Hilfskreuzer Möwe wrote:
WAVE the BENEFITS

I don't think I want to be around to see that.

Post by **notorial dissent** » Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:44 pm

Just more false advertising.

Post by **Burnaby49** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:15 am

Remember Dean Cory? He's the guy that almost had me discussing divorce with my wife! I chickened out and we still haven't had that little talk but still . . . .

Re: Dean Kory - A Study in Free Living

by Burnaby49 » Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:22 pm

I like that little play on words. Meads doesn't apply to Dean's situation since Mr. Meads, being married, wasn't a Freeman because he was not a "free man". Bachelors only in this boy's club!

The comment makes a valid point. Pretty much all the Canadian Freemen we've reviewed in Quatloos have been single, either never married or, like Dean, divorced. I thought it was because they are such narcissistic jerks but it turns out to be a requirement of the position. Looks like I'll never be able to claim all the wonderful bounty that the Freemen obviously enjoy unless I come to a new understanding with my wife. I'm sure she'll understand that it's been a great 36 years but she's now holding me back from my true destiny.

It's been a while, almost exactly a year, since he was discussed here so time for a bit of an update. How are things going for our litigious Freeman? Not well. He's living in a shack and asking (begging) for financial support to back his legal(ish) campaigns:

http://www.gofundme.com/n4nahw

To his credit he managed to raise vastly more money than Menard's attempt at crowdsourcing, the "Synergy Property Stewards":

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/syne ... y-stewards

Don't know why more people didn't sign on to that. Perhaps it was his somewhat unwise choice of a photo. He looks like an albino gorilla.

However Menard did offer some value for money. For $25 you got the Secret of Menard's Consumer Purchase Scheme:

Understanding Consumer Notes

This is a compilation of the letters sent to various people concerning our right to use consumer notes to pay for consumer purchases. With this understanding, you too will be able to go to a restaurant or pub, enjoy a meal, and pay for it by properly signing and marking the bill, turning it into a 'consumer note', a specie of money suitable for paying for that meal. This is in PDF and will be emailed to you.

Yes, the same scheme he is promoting with such success right now!

While Kory has been much more successful in raising cash I'm not so sure he has achieved an optimal lifestyle:

i have been facing the courts alone without help for several years now and i have a progressing disability that keeps me from working and providing for myself or to cover the surmounting court costs associated.

The corrupt powers that be have seen fit to maliciously cut off all financial assistance so that i can no longer cover even the basic necessities of life let alone continue with court actions.

More than a year ago i set out to ask the government to assist me in providing me with the necessities of life as i have physical disabilities preventing me from employment and gaining a livelihood. i have no I.D. to give to them, no government issued I.D and i could only agree to their contract by adding my terms and conditions...Notice how Miss. Ozborne at 18:55 disrespectfully giggles when the adjudicator mistakenly refers to me as "Kory" and how quickly and honorably the adjudicator corrects himself! ... When the system violates your rights and steals your property, injuring you physically to the degree that you can no longer work or be able to provide for yourself, it's not a laughing matter nor is it a "handout!" i was asking for a helping hand up!... There may be many people who abuse the system but if you research the reality of how that system truly operates...you will see clearly that the system abuses the people!

i dedicate many hours a day 7 days a week to researching and posting all that i can sharing my story and others stories who are in the same boat...yes this is real!...i have been cut off financial assistance, denied health care and i have been targeted by corrupt police, assaulted and framed on bogus charges and unlawfully jailed for my efforts

i am lucky to have some very caring, understanding and generous friends in my circle who have gone out of their way to do what they can to help me and they have provided me with shelter and food when they can afford to. I'm currently living in an 8x12 insulated shed with heat , hydro and wifi, no running water or bathroom, no kitchen but i am safe and warm.

Dean is still unsuccessfully trying to get his daughter back. He hasn't, after all this time, seemed to realize that his methods might be somewhat counter-productive or that a guy aggressively demanding welfare and currently living in a 96 square foot shack without water or a toilet and sink isn't considered an ideal candidate for parental custody.

He is carefully monitoring his ex's activities and has some ... interesting comments about her activities: https://www.facebook.com/dean.kory/post ... 0297294022

Another productive life. Freemanism! Making everything better since 2000 (or so).

Post by **ArthurWankspittle** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:11 am

More than a year ago i set out to ask the government to assist me in providing me with the necessities of life as i have physical disabilities preventing me from employment and gaining a livelihood. i have no I.D. to give to them, no government issued I.D and i could only agree to their contract by adding my terms and conditions....

Meanwhile, his strawman is living a frugal but passably comfortable life on government benefits, getting medical care and his strawdaughter occasionally visits him at his little heated apartment with a bathroom.

Post by **notorial dissent** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:17 am

Poor bunny, desperately wants a gov't handout, but doesn't seem to think the rules apply to him or that he should have to follow such. I find it hard to believe that he does not have ID of some kind.

LordEd · Post by **LordEd** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:01 pm

Another example of collateral damage caused by freemanism.

Post by **Burnaby49** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 4:54 am

Time for a six month update on Dean. Last time we visited him he was broke, whining that he wanted welfare, and living in a shack without heat or water. But things are looking up, he's closing in on a $300,000 court award against the Crown! Read all about it on his Facebook page;

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater

Date: SCHEDULE court file #
Action - (Section 48)
FEDERAL COURT
Between:
Plaintiff /Owner and Speaking to this matter:.........................................................., Sole Living Beneficiary of the trust in regards to the birth certificate bond under seal of the Registrar General of Ontario, A Private Individual with my intrinsic rights as a man whole and intact. A NON contributer to the economic, social and cultural development of Her Majesty operating as Canada.
and
Defendants/ Offenders:
Her Majesty the Queen ...............................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Facts of Substance
(see attached)
Relief Sought
The plantiff therefore claims as follows:
a) I require the Proper Administration of Justice to provide injunctive relief to keep offenders at bay.
b) Order the Immediate Restoration of my Property/Birthright with the promise from Her Majesty the Queen of NO FURTHER UNLAWFUL TRESPASS against my Life, Lberty and/or Property.
c) Compensation for Costs and Damages to be paid FORTHWITH in the amount of :
$....................................................,and/or or a Promise to Pay this ammount by Her Majesty.
Dated at .................the ............day of......................20............
Private Individual/Owner:..............................................,
Restricted Use, Restricted Capacity, All Other Rights Protected.

Has Dean really got off his ass and filed something in Federal Court? Yep - he did!

http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/In ... ?T-1546-15

http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/In ... =T-1546-15

The remedy seems reasonable enough:

The plantiff therefore claims as follows:
a) I require the Proper Administration of Justice to provide injunctive relief to keep offenders at bay.

b) Order the Immediate Restoration of my Property/Birthright with the promise from Her Majesty the Queen of NO FURTHER UNLAWFUL TRESPASS against my Life, Lberty and/or Property.

c) Compensation for Costs and Damages to be paid FORTHWITH in the amount of: $300,000.00, and/or or a Promise to Pay this amount by Her Majesty.

And what did Dean attach? Why, it's Scott Duncan's Notice of Mistake!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... 652&type=1

Post by **notorial dissent** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 5:11 am

Well you have to give him points, he got at least one thing right he is "A NON contributer to the economic, social and cultural development of Her Majesty operating as Canada", I don't think any court in the land would gainsay that point, the rest, not so much.

LordEd · Post by **LordEd** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 1:34 pm

If he's a non contributor, what good is money?

Post by **notorial dissent** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:07 pm

That would seem to be the whole point, he wants to be contributed to, not contributing to something. As it is, it's a wash. He contributes nothing, and will get lots of that in return.

theSovereign1 · Post by **theSovereign1** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:25 am

in a free society is it lawful to comple someone by threats of violence and incarceration to accept benifits and services? Am I compelled to believe in your FICTION OF LAW you call a country or province? Pretty sure these idiots have sworn an oath to uphold the constitution and charter right? pretty sure it says in section 2 they have to let us to our beliefs and we have right of association...if their glorious society was so great then why do they need to deceive and force us to be a member hmmm? If I do not believe in their fictional imaginary ideas am i subject to their fictional imaginary INTERNAL CORPORATE STATUTE CODES?

FICTION OF LAW

The assumption that a certain thing is true, and which gives to a person or thing a quality which is not natural to it, and consequently establishes, a certain disposition, which, without the fiction, would be repugnant to reason and to truth. It is an order of things which does not exist, but which the law prescribes or authorizes. It differs from presumption because it establishes as true, something which is false; whereas presumption supplies the proof of something true.

The law never feigns what is impossible. Fiction is like art; it imitates nature, but never disfigures it. It aids truth, but it ought never to destroy it. It may well suppose that what was possible, but which does not exist; but it will never feign that what was impossible actually is.

Fictions were invented by the Roman praetors who, not possessing the power to abrogate the law, were nevertheless willing to derogate from it under the pretence of doing equity. Fiction is the resource of weakness which, in order to obtain its object, assumes as a fact what is known to be contrary to truth: when the legislator desires to accomplish his object, he need not feign, he commands. Fictions of law owe their origin to the legislative usurpations of the bench.

It is said that every fiction must be framed according to the rules of law, and that every legal fiction must have equity for its object. To prevent their evil effects, they are not allowed to be carried further than the reasons which introduced them necessarily require.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f111.htm?PageSpeed=noscript

theSovereign1 · Post by **theSovereign1** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:28 am

if we are all equal under the law doesn't that denote that no man has authority over another unless it is granted? hence the doctrine "by consent of the governed"?

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

theSovereign1 · Post by **theSovereign1** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:29 am

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"...

Post by **The Observer** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:30 am

Wow, a cut-and-paste job from the 'Lectric Law Library. Another sovrun gibberish factory.

theSovereign1 wrote:If I do not believe in their fictional imaginary ideas am i subject to their fictional imaginary INTERNAL CORPORATE STATUTE CODES?

If I believe you to be fictional, will you disappear?

The Declaration of Independence

I guess you don't understand that this is not law. And certainly not Canadian law.

theSovereign1 · Post by **theSovereign1** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:31 am

WHAT IS SOVEREIGNTY? It is the inherent right and prerogative of a civilized people to rule itself, and to dictate all of the forms and conditions of the institutions it sets up to carry out this rule. Ironically, the U.S. SUPREME COURT agrees with those people who claim to be SOVEREIGN citizens of the American Republic!

Bond vs. UNITED STATES, 529 US 334 – 2000, The Supreme Court held that the American People are in fact Sovereign and not the States or the Government. The court went on to define that local, state and federal law enforcement officers were committing unlawful actions against the Sovereign People by the enforcement of the laws and are personally liable for their actions.
Bond v. United States, 529 US 334 – 2000 – ‎Supreme Court – Cited by 761 litigants in other cases.
Bond v. US, 131 S. Ct. 2355 – 2011 – ‎Supreme Court – Cited by 306 “ “
Bond v. US, 1 F. 3d 631 – 1993 – ‎Court of Appeals, 7th – Cited by 66 “ “

What are the implications of this 2000, U. S. Supreme Court ruling?

1] The delegates to the first Federal Convention prohibited the use of corporations by all governments representing the American Republic. Therefore, all of these corporate governments and their corporate laws are a usurpation of the organic Constitution of the United States of America. All State Governments are now sub-corporations of the Federal Government, making all Courts and all law enforcement personnel, corporate federal agencies or employees. [See: James Madison Journal of the Federal Convention, Vol. 2, P. 722] and [Pull up your State Code on your PC and search the Code for the words “District of Columbia” and “Federal Government.” You will receive about 1000 references linking your state to the federal government.]

2] The state and federal government is a corporation and therefore the Congress, State Legislatures, City Councils, Municipalities and all State and Federal Courts are corporate entities posing as Constitutional branches of government.

3] Corporations are privately owned businesses, meaning that the Corporate United States belongs to one or more private individuals, which is always governed by a Board of Directors. The Corporate United States is privately owned by a group of European Royal and Elite individuals tied to the Federal Reserve System and the letters of incorporation are recorded in the Vatican. The President of the United States is actually the CEO of the United States and the Congress and all others are corporate employees. Everything they do is in the interest of the corporate owners! I can’t access those documents because of National Security.

4] In order to promulgate and enforce Criminal Laws to govern the SOVEREIGN public, government must be SOVEREIGN too, which is an accepted RULE of LAW derived from the, Ancient Law of Kings. Corporations are not and can never be SOVEREIGN. They are not real, they are a fiction and only exist on paper.

5] Therefore, all laws created by these government corporations are private corporate regulations called public law, statutes, codes and ordinances to conceal their true nature. Do the Judge and your lawyer know about this? You bet they do!

6] Since these government bodies are not SOVEREIGN, they cannot promulgate or enforce CRIMINAL LAWS; they can only create and enforce CIVIL LAWS, which are duty bound to comply with the LAW of CONTRACTS. The Law of Contracts requires signed written agreements and complete transparency! Did you ever agree to be arrested and tried under any of their corporate statutes? For that matter, did you ever agree to contract with them by agreeing to be sued for violating their corporate regulations?

[Citations and Complaints are contracts but they lack transparency because you were never told what might happen to you if you agree to contract, and that you had a right to refuse the accommodation!]

7] Do any of Americas Courts have Jurisdiction over a SOVEREIGN? Yes … but only by your consent to be judged by the Court. Can they compel [Summon or Subpoena] you to appear or participate in their process? No … they can’t compel you and Yes … they can ask but you can reject the accommodation in writing and nothing can be done about it because you have refused to give the court jurisdiction over you!

8] Enforcement of these corporate statutes by local, state and federal law enforcement officers are unlawful actions being committed against the SOVEREIGN public and these officers can be held personally liable for their actions. [Bond v. U.S., 529 US 334-2000]

9] There being no Constitutional Criminal Laws or Transparency in the American Justice System, everyone arrested, convicted and sentenced to prison under these CIVIL LAWS are in prison by CONSENT and therein, all American Jails are actually DEBTORS PRISONS!

10] Most of the County and State Prisons and all of the Federal Prisons are privately owned corporate businesses for profit, which kick back to the sentencing Judges. The Bureau of Prisons Privatization Management Branch provides general oversight, for these institutions. So if you are convicted in these Courts, you can expect to serve some jail time! Now you know why America has such high prison populations!

11] Can the State Government and Courts take Custody of your children? Only with your consent, otherwise their agents and officers can be held personally liable for their actions! Orphans are a different matter and can become wards of the Court until emancipated.

Corporate governments are a usurpation of the organic American Constitution and this corporatist onslaught in America has since its creation, been an ANTI-SOVEREIGN and TERRORIST REGIME and are in fact the real TERRORIST and TRAITORS to the American Republic.

http://anticorruptionsociety.com/2013/0 ... franchise/

Hanslune · Post by **Hanslune** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:57 am

theSovereign1 wrote:if we are all equal under the law doesn't that denote that no man has authority over another unless it is granted? hence the doctrine "by consent of the governed"?

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

Howdy

Why are you quoting the Constitution of the United States when discussing Canadian law??

theSovereign1 · Post by **theSovereign1** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:07 am

The Observer wrote:Wow, a cut-and-paste job from the 'Lectric Law Library. Another sovrun gibberish factory.

theSovereign1 wrote:If I do not believe in their fictional imaginary ideas am i subject to their fictional imaginary INTERNAL CORPORATE STATUTE CODES?
If I believe you to be fictional, will you disappear?

The Declaration of Independence
I guess you don't understand that this is not law. And certainly not Canadian law.

1 lect law is run by the FBI Civil Rights division....
2 hello its the principals that count...the corporate fiction called canada was founded on the same principals if you doubt me go read the Canadian Bill of Rights.
3 "this is not law" oh really...ok what is it then smarty pants? Your statement just shows how ignorant you are.

Post by **Arthur Rubin** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:19 am

theSovereign1 wrote:Bond vs. UNITED STATES, 529 US 334 – 2000, The Supreme Court held that the American People are in fact Sovereign and not the States or the Government.

Not bad -- as creative writing. The word "Sovereign" does not appear in the opinion.

theSovereign1 · Post by **theSovereign1** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:22 am

Arthur Rubin wrote:
theSovereign1 wrote:Bond vs. UNITED STATES, 529 US 334 – 2000, The Supreme Court held that the American People are in fact Sovereign and not the States or the Government.
Not bad -- as creative writing. The word "Sovereign" does not appear in the opinion.

is a summation dirtbag