Freedom of Information

[Ian Robb Forgie]

I would like to take the opportunity to point out a couple of facts  Freedom of Information Act (United States)

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 and The B.C .FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT
[RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 165

Only a Representative of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth second can speak to the Indigenous People that means you can elect whom ever you want the answer in No.
  The privilege, to think; to form or have (a particular thought) in your mind, or that a particular situation exists, or that something will happen, or to have an opinion about someone or something as to under what circumstances establish that the fact the Individual was nice enough to speak to you in the English. 
   No freeman is to be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or of his liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go against such a man or send against him save by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell or deny of delay right or justice.

[debbieredbear]

I would like to take the opportunity to point out a couple of facts  Freedom of Information Act (United States)

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 and The B.C .FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT
[RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 165

Only a Representative of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth second can speak to the Indigenous People that means you can elect whom ever you want the answer in No.
  The privilege, to think; to form or have (a particular thought) in your mind, or that a particular situation exists, or that something will happen, or to have an opinion about someone or something as to under what circumstances establish that the fact the Individual was nice enough to speak to you in the English. 
   No freeman is to be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or of his liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go against such a man or send against him save by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell or deny of delay right or justice.

 British Columbia and the Queen have zip to do with the US. And anyway, what is your point?

[Sparks]

I would like to take the opportunity to point out a couple of facts  Freedom of Information Act (United States)
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 and
The B.C .FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT [RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 165

Those two Acts may be read here:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code/Title_5/Part_I/Chapter_5/Subchapter_II
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States)

http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/96165_00
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_in_Canada

Only a Representative of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth second can speak to the Indigenous People that means you can elect whom ever you want the answer in No.
  The privilege, to think; to form or have (a particular thought) in your mind, or that a particular situation exists, or that something will happen, or to have an opinion about someone or something as to under what circumstances establish that the fact the Individual was nice enough to speak to you in the English. 
   No freeman is to be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or of his liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go against such a man or send against him save by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell or deny of delay right or justice.

This piece of ungrammatical and incomprehensible gibberish has nothing to do with the above acts. It reflects the crackpot reasoning that comes from the "Freeman on the Land"-movement. Ian Robb Forgie (Ian Robb:Forgie) is a Canadian who has posted a lot more such stuff, especially in these forums:

http://worldfreemansociety.org/forum  (Related to http://www.public.worldfreemansociety.org/)
http://www.fmotl.com/forum/index.php  (Related to http://www.fmotl.com/)

These are a couple of Mr. Ian Robb Forgie's postings on the Internet:

http://iforgieinformation.yolasite.com/  &  http://thesecondaquienceofianrobbforgie.yolasite.com/

He is even on the infamous David Icke's Official Forums: https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=228064

There is much talk about petitions. Mr. Forgie has been kind enough to post The Supreme Court of British Columbia's response:

Part 4: … 2. The Petition is largely indecipherable and incomprehensible.

I usually don't claim clairvoyance, but in this case: Expect much more of the same from any future posts of Mr. Forgie.

Finally, I post a few links explaining the background and reasoning of the "Freeman on (or of) the Land" people:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land
https://skeptoid.com/blog/2013/10/14/the-legal-gibberish-of-freeman-on-the-land/
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/06/12/freeman-of-the-land-are-bad-citizens

[educatedindian]

It does seem like Forgie just wants attention. We've criticized freemen and sovereign types before because some of them do quite a bit of damage to NDN causes and people, groups like Sovrans and the Little Shell Pembinas. A search online shows Forgie is not exactly a big figure among the freemen. So let's not give him the spotlight.

[Ian Robb Forgie]

It is a mater of Historical Record and how it is being interpreted all those decisions were made long before I was born. The Indigenous people are nice enough to speak to me in English that's as good as it gets.
1. the land does not belong to me and 2.
2. I don't speak for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth she speaks for herself.
3. Representatives of Parliament or the Legislature deal with the City of London (corporations)